Re: Load 0.20 on a freshly installed idle system

On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 11:10 AM Ian Smith <smithi@nimnet.asn.au> wrote:
>
> Yes; I updated to 12.4-R yesterday (due anyway) assuming 'months ago' should have been before 12.4 left 12-STABLE, but see no change.
>
> I emailed gbe@ as well, in case he's buried in PR mail.\

Yeah, I saw your reply. Thanks a lot Ian!

>
> I put quite some time exploring this back in 2016, as did Jeremy Chadwick, so I'd pretty much given up since 0.1 or 0.2 nowadays is better than 0.6 then, and noone could explain how my magic fix for 9.2-STABLE worked, let alone me.
>
> I now understand a bit better what Alexander Motin (mav@) was explaining in posts #9, #27 and now #46 and #48, and accept the trade-off between idle accuracy and performance (particularly minimal power consumption on laptops) that the current scheme provides.
>

On one hand I understand his point as well. On the other hand, well I
already said it, it's bugging me that it's not right :D

On a side note, I've been trying to see it for myself using KTR, but
having trouble converting the timestamp to actual time. I understand
it's what RDTSC is giving us, but was wondering if there is a formula
to convert it to secs?. Do you have any tips? Tried dividing by
`machdep.tsc_freq: 2419204467` but the number I get doesn't make much
sense. I assume with modern cpus changing the frequency all the time
this is even more challenging?

Thanks,
Stavros